Terms & Conditions

[Mark_Payne]

Grandmother rents a property to her grandson. The legal estate is vested in the grandmother and grandson, however the beneficial interest as per the declaration of trust held within the deeds of the property, is owned by 95% the Grandmother and only 5% grandson.

I take this to mean that the grandmother and grandson both have the same interest in the property, but the levels of ownership are split 95:5?

It’s not shared equity, is there any way under the regs this can be paid?

[markp]

Sticking head above parapets!!

Have you got Land Reg docs to show who is named as owner? If grandson is down as owner then surely he can’t get HB.

If it is a trust, then who is the beneficiary of the trust? Again if it is the grandson, then, as beneficiary HB is not payable to him.

I think you may need to explore those avenues before making a decision (Apologies if you already have done, but it doesn’t say so, so I assume you haven’t)

Do I know what I'm doing? The jury's out on that........................

[Mark_Payne]

The Land Registy shows them as joint owners. There is no mention of a trust. Apparently there is no trust document as such, the solicitor wording is as the first post.

In my view I think we can’t pay, but was looking for inspiration before it ends up at TAS.

I believe that the grandmother bought the house to put the grandson in, and would leave it to him if she died. I’d suggest that the solicitor and/or grandmother decided that to protect the grandson they’d give him a share in the property – not considering the effect it could have on hb. The claim was initially turned down as “non commercial”, although “contrived” was also considered. When reconsidering the decision, I am simply looking at ownership, which will obviously preclude him from hb without the onus on the LA to prove contrivance and/or non commerciallity.

[Author]

Posts